AMD has always been behind Intel in terms of technology and fabrications (right now they're just adopting threads and will in the future adopt 3 dimensional transistors) so this was expected. However, the upside to this is that they can sell these chips at an inexpensive price which is what AMD is known for to most people.

AMD has always been behind Intel in terms of technology and fabrications (right now they're just adopting threads and will in the future adopt 3 dimensional transistors) so this was expected. However, the upside to this is that they can sell these chips at an inexpensive price which is what AMD is known for to most people.

There's so many things wrong with your post its almost not worth a reply.

AMD was well ahead of Intel in the Athlon64 days, and from the looks of it, Bulldozer will compete quite nicely with Sandy Bridge.

There are far too many questions about this 3d transistor tech. to say that it is worth it right now. I'm not going to follow your lead and make a blind fanboy statement, but right now there is no proof that it will have much, if any, performance gain on anything above 20nm.

Add in to that the price factor (It wasn't cheap for Intel to develop this.) and the fact that by the time you start to see real gains, a more important breakthrough might have occured, and it's plain to see that this might not be all that important.

AMD was the first to have a 64 bit chip. Intel licensed the technology from them. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.

None of that matters now though because AMD is completely fabless. They partner with Globalfoundries, but they are free to buy wafers from anyone they want, including Intel if need be.Edited by Damn_Smooth - 5/6/11 at 1:18pm

AMD was the first to have a 64 bit chip. Intel licensed the technology from them. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.

No, you are wrong. He is right.

AMD developed x86-64... an expanded instruction set. This has absolutely nothing at all to do with fabrication technology. AMD/GlobalFoundries has been 12-24 months behind Intel in die shrinks for almost a decade.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damn_Smooth

There are far too many questions about this 3d transistor tech. to say that it is worth it right now. I'm not going to follow your lead and make a blind fanboy statement, but right now there is no proof that it will have much, if any, performance gain on anything above 20nm.

Add in to that the price factor (It wasn't cheap for Intel to develop this.) and the fact that by the time you start to see real gains, a more important breakthrough might have occured, and it's plain to see that this might not be all that important.

Intel stated that TriGates manufacturing cost are 2-3% more while providing 37% more performance and 50% less power in active state.

R&D isn't cheap but everyone is spending the money on it. How do you think more important breakthroughs occur? ...by R&D money and time. Non-planar silicon has been an idea for decades now.Edited by DuckieHo - 5/6/11 at 1:27pm